First Extract from Las Actitudes y Los Valores Sociales en Galicia/Attitudes and Social Values in Galicia

José Luis Veira Veira (dir.) (2007)

Part of a substantial study on changing patterns of social values in Galicia, this chapter looks at the issue of value change from a sociological perspective, drawing on the distinction between materialism and postmaterialism, touched on by Maslow and later developed in a sociological context by Inglehart.

The idea that social and economic changes proceed in unison is by no means new, and, while there may be slight differences in interpretation between authors, it is more or less universally accepted. As human behaviour is so complex, and influenced by factors operating on many different levels, it would be presumptuous to put forward any predictive model beyond the identification of general patterns which, incidentally, may be non-linear in nature. With these caveats in mind, the well-known materialism-postmaterialism distinction provides some basis for an explanation of the most recent shifts in social values to emerge. This hypothesis has obvious roots in Maslow’s work on the hierarchy of needs (Maslow, Motivation and Personality 1954: 141).3

This author has previously established a relationship between economic development, and the diminishing returns of successive rises in income, and individual and societal needs. As a starting point, Maslow conjectured the existence of a spectrum of needs, differentiated by the extent to which they are prerequisite for survival, whereby secondary needs only become significant once more essential requirements have been met.

According to this model, as the secular trend of economic expansion continues to advance, materialist values, i.e., those linked to the most basic, lowest-ranking needs on Maslow’s scale, concerned mainly with the subsistence imperative (i.e. survival and security), are likely to be progressively displaced by those of a postmaterialist nature. Postmaterialist values are located at higher levels of the hierarchy and are concerned with personal needs and self-actualisation, for example, greater participation in society and politics, a more humane social order, a stronger defence of independence and individual liberties, and so on.

This process, like almost all of those concerned with value change, is understood to be a lengthy one, causally linked to growth in income levels, but particularly to generational change. Those cohorts socialised in the new context are demonstrably more inclined towards these new value configurations.

Inglehart (1977, 1991 & 1998)4 reinterpreted Maslow’s theoretical perspective, which was predominantly concerned with psychology, in a sociological context, with the aim of analysing the progressive change in values in western societies. Inglehart’s thesis addresses social and cultural change, and so is not only concerned with socioeconomic aspects but with almost all forms of social evolution, although it envisages a direct causal link to economic processes.

According to Inglehart’s theory, value change is the result of the unprecedented prosperity experienced by western societies in the period following the Second World War. The achievement of high levels of physical and economic security by an ever greater proportion of the population allowed individuals to pursue the satisfaction of higher-level needs, which we can categorise as non-materialist in nature (for example the needs for affection, a sense of identity and belonging, freedom of expression, etc.). The values of a materialist society emphasised physical and economic security as well as individual economic achievement, with community obligations taking on a lower profile. In the institutional sphere, this kind of society is characterised by comprehensive centralisation and extension of the functions of the state, moving towards what we know as the bureaucratic welfare state. The expansion of mass production and the involvement of the state in almost all aspects of social life appear to be the end result of these secular trends.

From this perspective, the capitalist society is one built around the increasing prominence of materialist values which favour the accumulation of capital. However, once the populations of the earliest industrialised nations achieved a sufficiently high level of economic security and their basic subsistence needs were met, they began to be drawn towards post materialist values. The aspect of this process which has received the most attention is the shift from the primacy of the imperatives of economic and physical security to those of self-expression and quality of life. Although this transformation is undoubtedly related to changes at the economic level, there is no direct causal link between them. Rather, it originates in a subjective sense of satisfaction, and as such we must understand it as the result of a slow process of socialisation.

A sense of being secure in one’s immediate prospects for survival entails a transformation which leads to a complex ensemble of changes in the strategies for living adopted by individuals, amongst which the shift in values from a preoccupation with survival, characteristic of traditional and even modern societies, in favour of the increased emphasis on wellbeing found in advanced societies, is of particular note.

In other words, once immediate threats to life have been eliminated, concern for individual wellbeing and quality of life tends to increase. The implications of this transformation in modern values, brought about by the perception that survival is assured, permeate a great many different spheres and eventually begin to erode those institutions, both political and economic, which in western societies had previously been considered essential.

Although the fundamental goals of modernisation (growth and individual economic advancement) are still socially supported, for a growing proportion of the population their relative importance begins to decline. This process is also reflected in the realm of labour relations, where an emphasis on maximising earnings and job security gives way to a greater demand for fulfilling and meaningful work. Meanwhile, attitudes towards the ways in which authority is exercised in the workplace also undergo significant changes. Cooperative and participative structures begin to attract support at the expense of the traditional hierarchical structures of authority, as does the idea that status distinctions should be objectively justifiable.

In terms of the economic system and state intervention in the economy, there is a tangible reversal in the tendency to look to government to resolve any and all problems, and a consequently more widespread acceptance of capitalism and free-market principles.

This reversal is perhaps linked to the rejection of all forms of bureacratic authority, and to the increasing importance of individual autonomy. We are currently seeing a proliferation in the idea that government intervention is reaching a threshold beyond which it will become socially ineffective as well as posing a threat to individual autonomy. In other words, the process of governmental expansion has reached the point of diminishing returns.

In sociological terms, what we see in action here is known as the scarcity hypothesis; that is, individual priorities reflect the socioeconomic context, and a greater absolute value is conferred on those assets which are in short supply.

With the preceding discussion in mind, the process of transition from materialism to postmaterialism can be summarised as follows: The central objectives of industrial society were physical security and the accumulation of capital. The attainment of these objectives triggers a process of gradual change whereby their perceived importance, and that of the hierarchical institutions which helped secure them, is diminished.

Postmaterialism is directly related to economic development on a macrosocial level and to socioeconomic status on a microsocial level; that is, with individual and societal enjoyment of higher levels of economic security. To paraphrase, the decision to prioritise materialist objectives is inversely related to social status, and this relationship is reversed when postmaterialist values come into play. These general trends indicate the paths by which new values trickle down through society, with emerging values (which we might call postmaterialist) beginning to take precedence in high-status, socially prominent groups, filtering through to the remaining, more peripheral social groups as part of the processes of socialisation and generational change.

Focusing on socioeconomic values, we can see that this transformation can be depicted as a series of key trends, illustrated in table 6.1 [2], which we will continue to examine throughout this chapter.

3.This theory is not particularly novel in the field of microeconomics, if we bear in mind that authors including Menger (1871) and Edgeworth (1881) assumed the decreasing marginal utility of income as a basic starting premise. Specifically, Menger had already made reference to the establishment of a hierarchy of needs.

4. Drucker (1995) provides an alternative perspective which the reader may find illuminating in this context.

TRANSLATOR’S NOTES

[1]: Valores Economicos (Economic Values) is the title cited in the source text, but it seems to refer to Maslow’s 1954 work Motivation and Personality, published under in the Spanish-speaking world as Motivación y Personalidad. The author may be referring to a collected edition of Masow’s works, but in absence of a bibliography in this excerpt I felt it clearer to refer to the original work.

This website uses cookies to keep it working smoothly. These cookies collect no personal data and will be deleted when you close your browser. More information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.